<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (2) TMI 1960 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286403</link>
    <description>The High Court partially allowed the appeal, dismissing the disallowance of depreciation amount and the claim for unabsorbed depreciation. However, the court favored the appellant on the disallowance of legal fees, prior period expenses, and office expenditure. A fresh consideration was directed for legal fees and expenses, while the court upheld the decision on the office expenditure. The court also confirmed the non-admittance of the additional ground for levy of interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2020 18:08:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604965" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1960 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286403</link>
      <description>The High Court partially allowed the appeal, dismissing the disallowance of depreciation amount and the claim for unabsorbed depreciation. However, the court favored the appellant on the disallowance of legal fees, prior period expenses, and office expenditure. A fresh consideration was directed for legal fees and expenses, while the court upheld the decision on the office expenditure. The court also confirmed the non-admittance of the additional ground for levy of interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>